<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>I have some more information about the top down approach of the mooring proposed:<div><br></div><div>Last year we switched from the underneath attachment to the top attachment to resolve the issue of our pendents always wrapping themselves around the bottom of the mooring and then being unable to unwrap them easily and sometimes having to square them away from the dinghy.</div><div><br></div><div>Having them come out of the top fixed the wrapping issue. But dual pendants still twist around themselves. I think the issue is the weight of the pendents and the hardware prevents the swivel from swiveling, see attached picture. This might be less of an issue with the mooring float proposed, maybe, because all the hardware would be on top and not hanging over the top. Also the current is much stronger in front of the club so that might pull up on the hardware so it can swivel and get it off the mooring ball. </div><div><br></div><div>So we probably will want to think about using the two pendent approach, they are going to twist and it is going to cost twice an much to maintain. <span style="font-size: 12pt;">I'm not sure I'd go with double pendents at the IOS and Pepperrell Cove, though I can see using them in front of the Club.</span></div><div><br></div><div>I like the proposed float because there is room to store the pendents on top, but the users will need to remember to place them there when they drop them because they don't automatically spring back and coil themselves up, unless that is an option. Bottom line, I think they will still end up in the water.</div><div><br></div><div>When we upgraded last year we were told that the mooring hardware rules were changing for 2016 and everything was going to scale up in size. We opted to meet the 2016 rules even though we didn't have too, so the chain and pendent size went up one level, which of course meant it was going to cost a little more. So we may have to use heavier chain and larger pendents this year if we do any work on the moorings.</div><div><br></div><div>If we put one of these out front for the winter, would we put pendents on it or just the float?</div><div><br></div><div>Roy<br><br><div>> From: dan@dangingras.net<br>> To: JohnC@Myles.com; board@portsmouthyc.org<br>> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:19:20 -0500<br>> Subject: Re: [Board] FW: Mooring Float Information<br>> <br>> The reasons to move to these floats from the large balls are<br>> <br>> 1- Allow for the use of double pennants (which would have prevented the<br>> Osprey accident last year)<br>> 2- Move the swivel to the top of the chain and out of the water,<br>> preventing potential of the pennant against the swivel if it jams (which may<br>> have been the cause of the osprey accident)<br>> 3- Move the pennants out of the water to eliminate growth and prevent<br>> them from being run over (which happened a couple of times last year)<br>> <br>> Dan<br>> <br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: John Myles [mailto:JohnC@Myles.com]<br>> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 9:47 AM<br>> To: dan@dangingras.net; 'Board of Directors' <board@portsmouthyc.org><br>> Subject: RE: [Board] FW: Mooring Float Information<br>> <br>> At $550.00 it's about the same as the big mooring balls to replace.<br>> Bud<br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Board [mailto:board-bounces@portsmouthyc.org] On Behalf Of Dan Gingras<br>> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 9:40 AM<br>> To: 'Board of Directors' <board@portsmouthyc.org><br>> Subject: [Board] FW: Mooring Float Information<br>> <br>> Attached is what Nancy and I were discussing.<br>> <br>> Dan<br>> <br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Paul Roy [mailto:proy@proconinc.com]<br>> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 8:53 AM<br>> To: 'Dan Gingras (dan@dangingras.net)' <dan@dangingras.net><br>> Subject: FW: Mooring Float Information<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> Paul W. Roy<br>> Director of Business Development | Client Services<br>> 603.623.8811 ext 243<br>> 603.396.2352 cell<br>> proy@proconinc.com<mailto:proy@proconinc.com><br>> <br>> [Description: PROCON Logo email signatuure 2]<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> From: Scott Dawes [mailto:sdawes@gilmancorp.com]<br>> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 2:29 PM<br>> To: Paul Roy<br>> Cc: Liz Gilman<br>> Subject: Mooring Float Information<br>> <br>> Mr. Roy,<br>> <br>> Thank you for your interest in our mooring floats. As requested, I've<br>> attached some information to this e-mail in PDF format for your review.<br>> <br>> All of our mooring floats come with the non-marring fender deck ring and<br>> have a twelve-year warranty for net buoyancy and color.<br>> <br>> If you have any questions or if I can be of any further assistance, please<br>> do not hesitate to contact me.<br>> <br>> Respectfully,<br>> <br>> Scott Dawes<br>> VP of Aids to Navigation<br>> (860) 887-7080, Ext 14<br>> (860) 861-6623 (cell)<br>> (860) 886-5402 (fax)<br>> www.gilmancorp.com<http://www.gilmancorp.com><br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br></div></div> </div></body>
</html>